Fast fashion brands are adding thousands of new styles each year, but researchers warn that the systems needed to reuse clothes remain underdeveloped.
A new analysis of more than 8,000 garments in four EU countries found that most had either no damage or only minor flaws, meaning they could technically be reworn.
The report says cleaning, repair, depilling and restoration require skills, space, resources and technology that many rewear operators, especially non-profits, cannot manage at scale.
Cheap new clothing has weakened the resale value of second-hand garments, with only the top 5% to 10% of items commanding good prices.
Researchers say scaling rewear alone will have limited impact unless the fashion industry also reduces overproduction and addresses the unequal burden of waste on countries such as Ghana and Pakistan.
Fashion has never moved faster. In 2022, global clothing brand H&M added more than 4,000 new styles to its existing online catalogue, while Shein, the ultra-fast fashion giant, added more than 300,000. It has since become the most Googled fashion brand in the world.
But what is the environmental cost of fast fashion?
According to earlier estimates, more than 92 million tonnes of textiles are discarded every year, while only 0.3 per cent are kept in circulation.
In this context, a news analysis, Sorting for Circularity: Project Rewear, examined more than 8,000 garments in four European Union countries. Researchers found that 37 per cent had no damage and 41 per cent had only minor flaws. While the majority could be reused with value-adds like cleaning or repairs, the gap between what can be reworn and what is actually reworn exists because the rewear system remains underdeveloped.
Apart from the lack of a strong system, researchers also believe that what is trendy or what they call “perceived desirability” often decides resale value.
Researchers found that the rewear industry faces multiple challenges. Only the top 5 per cent to 10 per cent of garments sell at a good price. Why? Because fast fashion has made clothing cheap, and people are often wary of buying second-hand items.
“Consumer expectations are shaped by the artificially low cost of new clothing, while operational costs for logistics, authentication, and other services remain high,” the report said.
Other parts of the rewear ecosystem, such as charities, social enterprises, resale platforms and repair providers, do exist. But their efforts are uneven. Some repair and rental start-ups have seen success and growth, while others struggle to turn a profit, the report observed.
Beyond economics, the report says the sector also suffers from a lack of preparation for reuse. Activities such as cleaning, depilling, repair and restoration require dedicated skills, resources, space and technology. Many operators, particularly non-profits, are unable to prioritise this work at scale. Even when preparation for reuse does happen, it remains marginal compared with the overall volume of garments being processed.
So what is the solution?
While the report says Europe has “abundant technically rewearable stock and growing infrastructure”, supported by the existing policy system, it also says more work needs to be done.
But the report warned that scaling up rewear alone will have limited impact unless new clothing production is also reduced. It says the transition must constrain overproduction and promote global equity, rather than simply move waste through a different system.
Under the right conditions, businesses, governments, the financial sector, social enterprises, communities and charities can work together to make rewear a viable alternative to linear consumption, it said. But this would require economy-wide and society-wide change. The report says the desired outcomes will not be achieved through tweaks at the margins of the existing system, but through a deeper shift in what is valued, incentivised and prioritised.
One silver lining, according to the report, is Extended Producer Responsibility, or EPR. Under EPR, companies have to pay a fee depending on how wasteful or sustainable their products are.
The report also examined how the rewear circular economy works in two economically poorer countries — Ghana and Pakistan.
Often, second-hand clothing that does not get sold ends up in these countries, either to be resold or dumped in landfill.
In Kantamanto Market in Accra, Ghana, an estimated 15 million garments arrive every day. A thriving ecosystem of traders, tailors and repairers sorts through the garments for resale.
But the sheer scale of clothing arriving, combined with the little money available for damaged garments, means the burden of dealing with rich countries’ waste — much of which ends up in dumpyards — is disproportionately borne by local people.
In Pakistan, the rewear ecosystem works a little differently.
Over the years, the country has become a hub for sorting, re-export and recycling. It imports more than 800,000 tonnes of second-hand clothing annually and employs tens of thousands of people, especially in the Karachi Export Processing Zone.
While most repurposed garments are exported again to East Africa, a smaller share also ends up in local markets.